State v. Harris
Tennessee Supreme Court
1DissentDaughtrey, Justice
There are several propositions set out in the majority opinion with which I agree. There can be no legitimate question, for example, that “the fixing of prison terms for specific crimes involves a substantive penological judgment that, as a general matter, is properly within the province of legislatures, not courts.” Harmelin v. Michigan, 501 U.S. -, -, 111 S.Ct. 2680, 2703, 115 L.Ed.2d 836 (1991) (quoting Rummel v. Estelle, 445 U.S. 263, 275-276, 100 S.Ct. 1133, 1139-1140, 63 L.Ed.2d 382 (1980)). It is for this reason that when faced with an allegation that a particular sentence amounts to…
2Cases cited25 opinions
- Solem v. HelmSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Harmelin v. MichiganSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
- Robinson v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1962
- Rummel v. EstelleSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
- Weems v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1910
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.